Editorial Type:
Article Category: Research Article
 | 
Online Publication Date: 01 Mar 2025

Seasickness Simulator to Assess Anti-Motion Sickness Devices

,
,
,
, and
Page Range: 212 – 218
DOI: 10.3357/AMHP.6403.2025
Save
Download PDF

INTRODUCTION: There are various motion sickness (MS) simulators in the laboratory, but the conditions under which they induce MS symptoms are different from real-life conditions. This study aimed to design a seasickness simulator, close to ecological conditions, easy to set up, at a modest cost, and capable of rapidly inducing MS symptoms, to evaluate the effect of anti-motion sickness devices. The hypothesis was that this simulator would induce MS, reflecting the susceptibility of subjects in real-life conditions, meaning the more susceptible individuals were to MS in real conditions, the more severe and rapid their symptoms would be in the simulator.

METHODS: A total of 65 subjects with varying degrees of MS susceptibility (MS Susceptibility Questionnaire Short form) were exposed to a seasickness simulator for a maximum of 10 min. Measurements of subjective symptoms (Visual Analog Scale and time to onset of first symptoms) and physiological variables (heart rate and temperature) were taken.

RESULTS: Subjects covered the full range of MS susceptibility (from 0–100%). The average time in the simulator before the first symptoms of MS was 7.41 min ± 2.56 min. The time to onset of the first symptoms, the intensity of the symptoms, and heart rate were significantly correlated with the degree of susceptibility of subjects in real-life conditions.

DISCUSSION: The simulator induced varying intensity of MS depending on the subjects’ susceptibility. It thus replicates real-life conditions and can serve as a useful tool for facilitating the research of devices, techniques, and medications to combat MS.

de Thierry de Faletans C, Misericordia M, Vallier J-M, Duché P, Watelain E. Seasickness simulator to assess anti-motion sickness devices. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2025; 96(3):212–218.

Copyright: Reprint and copyright © by the Aerospace Medical Association, Alexandria, VA.
Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Sketch of the nautical simulator. 1) Pulleys fixed to the ceiling with ropes attached to the boat; 2) stripe of white LEDs; 3) list of 10 of the most common symptoms and a schematic representation of a visual analog scale; 4) cabin; 5) self-supporting pool; 6) camera; 7) iPad; 8) upper stops; 9) bench; 10) metronome; 11) infrared forehead thermometer; 12) heart rate monitor; 13) experimenters; and 14) subject.


Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

MSSQ-S raw scores (x-axis) and percentile susceptibility scores (y-axis). The squares are taken from normative data from Golding 2006.22 The study data covers the full range of susceptibility for both raw scores (0–50) and percentile scores (0–100%).


Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

Positive correlation between average VAS (x-axis) and MSSQ-S raw scores (y-axis); r = 0.793, P < 0.001.


Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.

Average and standard deviation of the central position of the rear cabin of the boat in three-dimensional space as a percentage of the oscillation cycle (12 cycles) during a 10-min simulation. The z-axis represents up-down movements, the x-axis represents front-back movements, and the y-axis represents left-right movements.


Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to: Camille de Thierry de Faletans, University of Toulon Faculty of Physical Education and Sports Studies, Avenue de L’université, La Garde 83130, France; watelaindeth@univ-tln.fr.
Received: 01 Nov 2023
Accepted: 01 Nov 2024
  • Download PDF